aaron.ballman added a comment. In D155457#4526168 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155457#4526168>, @xgupta wrote:
> In D155457#4523388 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155457#4523388>, @cor3ntin > wrote: > >> I'm not sure I understand the motivation for this change. Sure, people do >> that but they also might do the same thing for ssize_t, intmax_t, or to >> compare int to int32_t. >> I think a better heuristic would be to not emit a warning for any integral >> (and floating point?) type that have the same canonical types (but we >> probably still want one if their non-canonical type if the same) > > I am not sure but are you expecting these changes - > > // Don't warn if the comparison involves integral or floating-point types > with the same canonical types. > QualType LHSCanonical = Constant->getType().getCanonicalType(); > QualType RHSCanonical = Other->getType().getCanonicalType(); > if ((LHSCanonical->isIntegralOrEnumerationType() || > LHSCanonical->isFloatingType()) && > S.Context.hasSameType(LHSCanonical, RHSCanonical)) { > return false; > } > > This will silence a lot of warnings and a total 5 test case fails. Can you share some examples of what test cases start failing with that approach? What you have above matches what I think @cor3ntin was asking for and does seem like a pretty reasonable way to silence false positives. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D155457/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D155457 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
